Úvodní stránka Aktuální číslo Archiv čísel O časopisu Redakční rada Předplatné Pokyny pro autory Zaslat článek Kontakt English
 
Přihlášení |
 
registrace
   
zapomenuté heslo
 
odeslat
 

Transcranial magnetic stimulation in borderline personality disorder –  case series

Autoři: T. Svěrák1, P. Linhartová1, M. Kuhn1, A. Latalova1, B. Bednarova1, L. Ustohal1,2, T. Kasparek1,3
Autoři - působiště: 1Department of Psychiatry, Masaryk University and University Hospital Brno, Czech Republic, 2Applied Neurosciences Research Group, Central European Institute of Technology, Masaryk University (CEITEC MU), Brno, Czech Republic, 3Behavioral and Social Neuroscience Group, Central European Institute of Technology, Masaryk University (CEITEC MU), Brno, Czech Republic
Článek: Cesk Slov Neurol N 2019; 82(1): 48-52
DOI: 10.14735/amcsnn201948
Kategorie: Original Paper


Transkraniální magnetická stimulace u hraniční poruchy osobnosti –  série kazuistik

Souhrn

Cíl:
Článek představuje první výsledky individuálně navigované repetitivní transkraniální magnetické stimulace (rTMS) u čtyř pa­cientů s hraniční poruchou osobnosti (borderline personality disorder; BPD). Soubor a metody: Čtyři pa­cienti s BPD podstoupili během funkční MR (fMR) Go/ NoGo úkol navržený tak, aby bylo možné pozorovat individuální koreláty behaviorální inhibice. Místo s nejvyšším individuálním rozdílem v BOLD signálu v oblasti pravého dorzolaterálního prefrontálního kortexu mezi NoGo a Go podmínkou bylo vybráno jako cíl pro rTMS u každého pa­cienta. Následně čtyři pa­cienti absolvovali 15 sezení během 3 týdnů (jedno sezení každý všední den) individuálně navigované 10-Hz rTMS při intenzitě 110 % jejich individuálního motorického prahu. Jedno sezení zahrnovalo 1 500 pulzů rozdělených do 15 trainů, které trvaly vždy 10 s, pa­cienti absolvovali 22 500 pulzů během celé léčby. Výsledky: Stimulace byla pa­cienty tolerována velmi dobře a bez závažnějších vedlejších příznaků. Po absolvování stimulace pa­cienti referovali, že u sebe pociťují lepší kontrolu emocí, zejména hněvu, že jejich nutkání se sebepoškodit či jejich myšlenky na sebevraždu se snížily nebo úplně vymizely, stejně tak referovali i o vymizení epizod depersonalizace/ derealizace. Pa­cienti po léčbě také vykazovali méně depresivních symp­tomů.

Závěr:
rTMS s individualizovanou neuronavigací pomocí fMR Go/ NoGo úkolu se zdá být slibným nástrojem pro snížení impulzivního chování a zvýšení regulace emocí u pa­cientů s BPD. V příštích studiích je zapotřebí ověřit efekt rTMS u BPD pomocí dvojitě zaslepených studií na dostatečně velkém vzorku pa­cientů.

Klíčová slova:
repetitivní transkraniální magnetická stimulace – rTMS – hraniční porucha osobnosti – impulzivita – emoční regulace – Go/NoGo úkol – neuronavigace

Autoři deklarují, že v souvislosti s předmětem studie nemají žádné komerční zájmy.

Redakční rada potvrzuje, že rukopis práce splnil ICMJE kritéria pro publikace zasílané do biomedicínských časopisů.


 
předchozí článek  
zobrazit obsah  zobrazit obsah  
 
následující článek
 

Summary

Aim:
We present the results of a case series study of individual­ly navigated repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in four patients with borderline personality disorder (BPD). Patients and methods: Four patients with BPD performed a Go/ NoGo task dur­­ing functional MRI (fMRI) designed for observ­­ing behavioural inhibition neural cor­relates. The site within the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex with the largest dif­ference in BOLD signal between the NoGo and Go conditions was as­signed as a target for rTMS in each patient. Four patients underwent 15 ses­sions of individual­ly navigated 10-Hz rTMS treatment at 110% of their individual rest­­ing motor threshold for 3 weeks (one ses­sion per work­­ing day). One ses­sion contained 1,500 pulses delivered in 15 trains by 10 s, lead­­ing to a total of 22,500 pulses dur­­ing the treatment. Results: The treatment was very well tolerated without any serious side ef­fects. After the treatment, the patients reported that they felt better self-control of their emotions, especial­ly anger; that their urges for self-harm and suicidal thoughts decreased or disappeared; and that their derealisation/ depersonalisation episodes disappeared. Patients also showed less depres­sion symp­toms after the treatment.

Conclusion:
rTMS with neuronavigation individualised by a fMRI Go/ NoGo task is a promis­­ing tool for reduc­­ing impulsive behaviour and enhanc­­ing emotion regulation in BPD patients. Double-blind placebo-control­led studies in larger samples are neces­sary to draw further conclusions about rTMS ef­fectiveness in BPD.

Key words:
repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation – rTMS – borderline personality disorder – impulsivity – emotion 
regulation – Go/NoGo task – 
neuronavigation

Introduction

Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is a devastat­­ing pervasive mental il­lness with an estimated prevalence between 1 and 2% in the general population, up to 10% in psychiatric outpatients, and up to 20% in psychiatric inpatients [1]. The core elements in BPD include marked impulsivity and impaired emotional proces­sing [2]. Patients have increased emotional reactivity with longer time needed for their emotions to return to baseline [3]. At the same time, BPD patients have decreased abilities to regulate emotions [4]. Impulsivity in BPD occurs most often under the influence of emotions and manifests in various forms of risky (self-) des­tructive behaviour (e. g., drug abuse, risky sexual behaviour, binge eating, aggres­sion, and self-harm, includ­­ing frequent suicide attempts [1,5,6]). More than 10% of patients with BPD com­mit suicide, which is about 50 times more than in the general population [7]. Thus, target­­ing emotional regulation and behavioural inhibition appears crucial for prevent­­ing dangerous impulsive behaviour and its consequences in BPD patients [3,8].

On the neural level, emotion regulation and behavioural inhibition are as­sociated with functional impairment of the prefrontal-limbic network [4,9]. In the limbic system, the amygdala has been shown to be hyperactive when proces­s­­ing emotional stimuli; this has been found to be as­sociated with impulsive reactions [3,10– 12]. Several authors as­sociate impulsive behaviour with altered activity in other frontal regions (primarily the orbitofrontal cortex, ventromedial cortex and dorsolateral prefrontal prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) [12– 14]). The DLPFC plays an important role in cognitive emotion top-down regulation and in decision making [15,16]. In light of the crucial role of impaired prefrontal areas in BPD patients, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is a promis­­ing treatment tool because these regions are easily acces­sed by rTMS coils.

We present our pilot results with rTMS treatment of BPD at the Department of Psychiatry of the University Hospital Brno. To our knowledge, rTMS treatment has not been used in BPD patients in the Czech Republic; five articles [17– 21] about rTMS and BPD are available in the literature. We introduce individual neuronavigation of rTMS to the right DLPFC (rDLPFC) us­­ing indi­vidual results from a Go/ NoGo (GNG) task in functional MRI (fMRI) with the aim of find­­ing the most individual­ly suitable target for treat­­ing self-control dif­ficulties for the fist time.

Patients and methods

Research sample

Four patients who met the criteria for BPD accord­­ing to the International Clas­sification of Dis­eases, 10th Revision [22], were recruited in our case series study (3 women; average age 22 ± 3.9 years; average years of education 11.75 ± 1.89). Three patients were outpatients dur­­ing the treatment and one patient was hospitalised at the Department of Psychiatry of the University Hospital Brno dur­­ing the treatment. All patients had to be on stable medication from 6 weeks before the stimulation until the end of the stimulation. The exclusion criteria were ad­diction, acute psychotic state, severe depres­sion, and contraindications prevent­­ing MRI or rTMS.

Magnetic resonance imaging

Prior to treatment, the patients underwent fMRI with 3T machines Siemens Magnetom Prisma (Siemens Healthcare GmbH, Erlangen, Germany) at the Central European Institute of Technology (CEITEC) in Brno, Czech Republic. Dur­­ing fMRI, the patients performed a GNG task (TR = 2.280 ms; TE = 35 ms; res. 3 × 3 × 3 m­m). The sti­m­ulation coil was targeted at the site with the individual­ly highest activation in the NoGo > Go contrast, represent­­ing a crucial point for patients’ behavioural inhibition.

Go/NoGo task

The GNG task design was adapted from Albares et al. [23] (Fig. 1). Each trial in the GNG task consisted of a fixation point last­­ing between 2 and 6 s, fol­lowed by either the Go or NoGo stimulus for 0.2 s, fol­lowed by a post-trial black screen for 2 s. White letters A and B on a black background were used as the Go and NoGo stimuli. In 2/ 3 of cases, the fixation point was a red cros­s; 1/ 3 of the cros­ses were green. The patients were instructed that either a Go or NoGo stimulus would appear after the red cros­s, while the green cross would always be fol­lowed by a Go stimulus. Patients were further instructed to press a button as quickly as pos­sible whenever the Go stimulus appeared, but not to press the button when the NoGo stimulus appeared (i.e., to perform behavioural inhibition). The task contained 4 blocks of 54 trials each.

Fig. 1. Go/NoGo task design.

Determin­­ing the stimulation point

Data analysis was performed in SPM12 (The FIL Methods Group, London, United King­dom). In our previous analysis, we found that the behavioural inhibition network was more activated dur­­ing the NoGo condition after the red cross (NoGoRed) than dur­­ing the Go condition after the red cross (GoRed). Based on these results, the site with the maximum BOLD signal within the rDLPFC in NoGoRed > GoRed contrast was found and used as the rTMS target. The individual rDLPFC mask was derived from the Destrieux Atlas [24] from FreeSurfer software (The General Hospital Corporation, Boston, MA, USA) [25], combin­­ing areas from the sulcus frontalis inferior and sulcus frontalis superior to gyrus frontalis medius. The individual rDLPFC mask was obtained by proces­s­­ing anatomical images of each patient us­­ing the FreeSurfer 5.3.0 software [25]. The stimulation coil was subsequently targeted to the highest point of NoGoRed > GoRed contrast in the patient’s rDLPFC by Brainsight software TMS neuronavigation, ver. 2.2 (Rogue Research Inc., Montreal, QC, Canada).

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation protocol

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation was performed by DuoMag XT (Rogue Resolutions Ltd, Cardif­f, United Kingdom) with a 70BF cool coil. Patients underwent 15 stimulation ses­sions at 110% of their individual rest­­ing motor threshold (MT) over a period of 3 weeks with one ses­sion each work­­ing day. Patients received 1,500 pulses dur­­ing one ses­sion (total 22,500 pulses dur­­ing the whole procedure) with 10 Hz frequency. Train lasted 10 s with inter-train interval of 30 s. The MT was measured before the first stimulation ses­sion; it was defined as the lowest pos­sible intensity induc­­ing at least five motor responses from 10 pulses in the primary motor cortex above 50 μV measured from the abductor pol­licis brevis muscle (measured by EMG, a component of the DuoMag XT stimulator).

Rat­­ing scales and semi-structured interview

Patients were as­ses­sed us­­ing the Mont­gomery-Åsberg Depres­sion Rat­­ing Scale (MADRS), Clinical Global Impres­sions (CGI), and semi-structured interviews. This battery was presented to patients before and after the rTMS treatment. MADRS [26] as­ses­ses the presence and severity of depres­sive symp­toms. High-frequency stimulation of rDLPFC could cause depres­sion [27] or have a positive or negative ef­fect on mood [28,29]. This scale was included to monitor any worsen­­ing of patient mood. CGI scales are measures of symp­tom severity, treatment response, and treatment ef­ficacy in patients with mental disorders [30]. The ef­fect of rTMS on impulsive symp­toms and emotion regulation was captured by semi-structured interviews focused on the patient’s individual symp­toms.

These four patients were part of a larger open study for evaluat­­ing the neural ef­fects of rTMS in BPD patients; they were as­ses­sed by an unblinded rater.

Results

The average Montreal Neurological Institute and Hospital coordinate of the stimulated point in the rDLPFC area was: x = 26.49 ± 2.92; y = 60.89 ± 13.65; z = 57.01 ± 9.23. Treatment with rTMS was very well tolerated without any serious side ef­fects. Two patients reported headaches at the stimulation coil site last­­ing about 2 h that spontaneously resolved. The fol­low­­ing results constitute qualitative case reports based on semi-structured interviews completed with MADRS and CGI before and after the stimulation protocol.

Case study 1

The first patient (20-year-old woman) was medicated with 50 mg sertraline daily. She was treated as an outpatient and had never been hospitalised. She was self-harm­­ing by scratch­­ing and cutt­­ing herself at a frequency of approximately once in 30– 40 days; had long-term suicidal thoughts, but had never attempted suicide; felt social withdrawal and increased fear of people in social situations; and experienced frequent bursts of anger towards others.

After the rTMS treatment, the patient reported that her ability to recognise her emotions increased, and she was thus better able to regulate emotions. She reported that especial­ly when she was upset in social situations or when she had the urge to hurt herself, she was able to stop and think about what she wanted to do about her urgency or emotional state. She did not harm herself dur­­ing the treatment and reported fewer emotional outbursts. Moreover, she reported markedly improved attention. Her mood, as rated by MADRS, improved from 19 to 14 points and the CGI was improved from markedly ill (5) to mildly ill (3). Her il­lness was much improved (2) after the treatment.

Case study 2

The second patient (23-year-old man) was medicated with 10 mg of escitalopram and had been treated since the age of 20. He did not self-harm before the treatment; he had been hav­­ing suicidal thoughts once a week since the age of 21 and he had attempted suicide four times. He was easily ir­ritated with low frustration toleration. He had problems control­l­­ing anger and reported dif­ficulties in concentration.

After the rTMS, the patient reported that he experienced anger at a lower intensity and happiness as more intense, and his ir­ritability decreased, lead­­ing to calmer feelings. He also reported that he feels like he has more time to think before speak­­ing impulsively and his attention markedly increased. His MADRS score decreased from 2 to 0 points; CGI improved from moderately ill (4) to mildly ill (3). His il­lness was minimal­ly improved (3) after the treatment.

Case study 3

The third patient (18-year-old woman) had no medication, was hospitalised twice, and had been treated since the age of 16. She had suicidal thoughts last­­ing for two years with no suicide attempt, was self-harm­­ing by cutting, hitt­­ing with a meat gavel, or scratch­­ing herself to the point of bleed­­ing every day for two years. In con­nection with self-harming, she described that she had pseudo-hal­lucinatory experiences in the form of a man’s voice encourag­­ing her to harm herself and insult­­ing her. She reported that she often said things she im­mediately regretted; she had outbursts of anger, scream­­ing at people and threaten­­ing them; she had frequent episodes of derealisation; and she had abused alcohol daily for 2 years; however, she was abstinent at the begin­­­n­­ing of the rTMS treatment.

After the rTMS, the patient improved in her emotion regulation in stres­sful situations and in anger management. She experienced emotions as intense, but she could better recognise and control them. She did not experience any derealisation episodes and the voice in her head vanished and she also has managed to avoid harm­­ing herself, report­­ing decreased anxiety, improved attention, and improved sleep dur­­ing the treatment. Accord­­ing to the clinical rating, her mood improved significantly (MADRS dropped from 20 to 3 points) and her CGI decreased from severely ill (6) to mildly ill (3). She was much improved (2) after the treatment.

Case study 4

The fourth patient (27-year-old woman) had been medicated with 11 dif­ferent psychotropics (citalopram, escitalopram, sertraline, trazodone, quetiapine, chlorpro­thixene, topiramate, lithium, buspirone, promethazine, haloperidol) dur­­ing her treatment from 1998 to 2017 and underwent 6 psychiatric hospitalisations. She was medicated with lithium, quetiapine, and chlorprothixene at the time of stimulation. She had suicidal thoughts every day and had harmed herself by cutt­­ing with a razor blade and bleed­­ing from her veins every day since she was 23, and had attempted suicide 3 times by cutt­­ing her veins, had demonstrated risky sexual behaviour (approximately 80 sexual partners over 12 years, although she was mar­ried for 5 of those years). She often felt uncontrol­led anger toward people around her.

From the begin­n­­ing of the second treat­ment week, she reported spontaneous inexplicable crying, after which she felt significant relief. After the treatment, she reported reduced urges for self-harm, better anger management, especial­ly in interpersonal situations, improved attention, decreased anxiety, and improved mood (MADRS from 16 to 11). Her CGI improved from markedly ill (5) to moderately ill (4) and she was minimal­ly improved (3) after the treatment.

Discus­sion

We report the first study in the Czech Republic us­­ing individual fMRI-based navigat­­ing rTMS and examin­­ing the therapeutical potential of rTMS in BPD patients. rTMS appeared to be well tolerated without serious side ef­fects and led to reduced BPD symp­toms in individual patients. After treatment, the patients described increased emotional awarenes­s, which subsequently helped them to regulate emotions more ef­ficiently. Tendency to self-harm, vague suicidal thoughts, derealisation, and increased af­fective ir­ritation were not experienced by patients approximately from mid-treatment to the end of the treatment. Patients described improved moods and marked improvement in their attention among other ef­fects of rTMS treatment.

Our results are in line with the exist­­ing literature, 5 articles focused on treat­­ing BPD symp­toms with rTMS [17,19– 21,31]. Individual studies reported similar outcomes in BPD patients in terms of better self-control and emotional regulation, improved mood, and decreased anxiety. Despite the similar pattern of rTMS ef­fects in BPD, studies dif­fer substantial­ly in stimulation parameters, includ­­ing stimulation brain targets.

Based on previous results, high frequency rTMS should lead to increased metabolism in the stimulated area [32,33]. This could lead to increased prefrontal-limbic con­nectivity, which represents top-down cognitive emotion regulation, but there has not been a study prov­­ing this mechanism. Such ef­fects should lead to improved af­fective stability, emotion regulation, and impulsivity symp­toms as was observed in this pilot study and previous studies. There has not yet been a study about the mechanism of the neural ef­fect of rTMS, optimal stimulation parameters, and the best area for the stimulation in BPD patients.

The limits of our study include the small pilot sample of BPD patients and the prevalence of subjective reports for ef­fects description. Future studies should test rTMS treatment in larger patient samples us­­ing protocols for results evaluation, includ­­ing question­naires and behavioural tests specifical­ly for BPD patients (like Min­nesota Borderline Personality Disorder Scale [MBPD] [34] and the Borderline Symp­tom list 23 [BSL-23] [35]). We focused primarily on the tolerability of stimulation and clinical ef­fects perceived by patients in our study, but it would be appropriate to quantify and objectivise the ef­fect with at least the above-mentioned scales. Neural ef­fects of rTMS treatment in BPD should also be as­ses­sed.

We only observed the patients dur­­ing the time of treatment. Future studies should evaluate the long-term ef­fects of rTMS in BPD, because the persistence of the ef­fect over time has not yet been examined. The literature about rTMS in depres­sion indicates that the positive ef­fect could persist for 4 to 5 months [36,37]. The maintenance treatment after this time should be further examined. One pos­sibility would be to administer rTMS twice weekly for 1 month, once weekly for 2 months, and twice monthly for 9 months (see in [38]). Because the ef­fects of rTMS in BPD were demonstrated mainly in emotional dimensions, it could be more appropriate to navigate rTMS us­­ing an emotional GNG task in future. The study lacked a control group. There are not many double-blind placebo-control­led trials of rTMS in BPD. However, rTMS protocol could pos­sibly induce placebo ef­fects. For the duration of the treatment, the patients visited our department daily and were frequently asked about their state. Double-blind placebo-control­led studies are needed to exclude the influence of placebo ef­fects of rTMS protocols in BPD patients.

Conclusion

The cur­rent literature suggests that rTMS is a wel­l-tolerated treatment without any serious side ef­fects in BPD patients and a potential­ly useful tool for reduc­­ing BPD symp­toms, includ­­ing impulsivity and emotion regulation impairment. However, double-blind placebo-control­led studies in larger samples of patients with BPD are needed to further evaluate this method of BPD treatment.

The authors declare they have no potential conflicts of interest concerning drugs, products, or services used in the study.

The Editorial Board declares that the manu­script met the ICMJE “uniform requirements” for biomedical papers.

The contribution was supported by the grant of AZV MZ ČR 15-30062A and the project-specific university research of the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic MUNI/ A/ 0976/ 2017 and by institutional support MH CZ Development of Research Organization FNBr, 65269705.

We acknowledge the core facility MAFIL of CEITEC supported by the Czech-BioImag­­ing large RI project (LM2015062 funded by MEYS CR) for their support with obtain­­ing scientific data presented in this paper.

Mgr. Tomas Sverak

Department of Psychiatry

Masaryk University

University Hospital Brno

Jihlavska 20

625 00 Brno

Czech Republic

e-mail: tomas.sverak@mail.muni.cz

Accepted for review: 15. 7. 2018

Accepted for print: 10. 12. 2018

References

1. Lieb K, Zanarini MC, Schmahl C et al. Borderline personality disorder. Lancet 2004; 364(9432): 453– 461. doi: 10.1016/ S0140-6736(04)16770-6.
2. Linehan MM, Heard HL, Armstrong HE. Naturalistic fol­low-up of a behavioral treatment for chronical­ly parasuicidal borderline patients. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1993; 50(12): 971– 974. doi: 10.1001/ archpsyc.1993.01820240055007.
3. Donegan NH, Sanislow CA, Blumberg HP et al. Amygdala hyper­reactivity in borderline personality disorder: implications for emotional dysregulation. Biol Psychiatry 2003; 54(11): 1284– 1293. doi: 10.1016/ S0006-3223(03)00636-X.
4. Schulze L, Schmahl C, Niedtfeld I. Neural cor­relates of disturbed emotion proces­s­­ing in borderline personality disorder: a multimodal meta-analysis. Biol Psychiatry 2016; 79(2): 97– 106. doi: 10.1016/ j.bio­psych.2015.03.027.
5. American Psychiatric As­sociation. The dia­gnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. DSM 5. 5th ed. Washington DC: American Psychiatric As­sociation Publish­­ing 2013.
6. Cyders M, Combs J, Fried RE et al. Emotion-based impulsivity and its importance for impulsive behavioral outcomes. In: Las­siter GH (ed). Impulsivity: causes, control and disorders. New York: Nova Science Publishers 2009: 105– 126.
7. Oldham JM, Gabbard GO, Goin MK, American Psy­­-chiat­ric Association. Practice guideline for the treatment of patients with borderline personality disorder. Am J Psychiatry 2001; 158(Suppl 10): 1–52.
8. Ansell EB, Sanislow CA, McGlashan TH et al. Psychosocial impairment and treatment utilization by patients with borderline personality disorder, other personality disorders, mood and anxiety disorders, and a healthy comparison group. Compr Psychiatry 2007; 48(4): 329– 336. doi: 10.1016/ j.comppsych.2007.02.001.
9. Wager TD, Davidson ML, Hughes BL et al. Prefrontal-subcortical pathways mediat­­ing succes­sful emotion regulation. Neuron 2008; 59(6): 1037– 1050. doi: 10.1016/ j.neuron.2008.09.006.
10. Mitchell AE, Dickens GL, Picchioni MM. Facial emotion proces­s­­ing in borderline personality disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Neuropsychol Rev 2014; 24(2): 166– 184. doi: 10.1007/ s11065-014-9254-9.
11. De La Fuente JM, Goldman S, Stanus E et al. Brain glucose metabolism in borderline personality disorder. J Psychiatr Res 1997; 31(5): 531– 541. doi: 10.1016/ S0022-3956(97)00001-0.
12. Soloff PH, Pruitt P, Sharma M et al. Structural brain abnormalities and suicidal behavior in borderline personality disorder. J Psychiatr Res 2012; 46(4): 516– 525. doi: 10.1016/ j.jpsychires.2012.01.003.
13. Matsuo K, Nicoletti M, Nemoto K et al. A voxel-based morphometry study of frontal gray matter cor­relates of impulsivity. Hum Brain Mapp 2009; 30(4): 1188– 1195. doi: 10.1002/ hbm.20588.
14. Soloff PH, Meltzer CC, Becker C et al. Impulsivity and prefrontal hypometabolism in borderline personality disorder. Psychiatry Res 2003; 123(3): 153– 163. doi: 10.1016/ S0925-4927(03)00064-7.
15. Kohn N, Eickhoff SB, Schel­ler M et al. Neural network of cognitive emotion regulation –  an ALE meta-analysis and MACM analysis. Neuroimage 2014; 87: 345– 355. doi: 10.1016/ j.neuroimage.2013.11.001.
16. Krain AL, Wilson AM, Arbuckle R et al. Distinct neural mechanisms of risk and ambiguity: a meta-analysis of decision-making. Neuroimage 2006; 32(1): 477– 484. doi: 10.1016/ j.neuroimage.2006.02.047.
17. Arbabi M, Hafizi S, Ansari S et al. High frequency TMS for the management of Borderline Personality Disorder: a case report. Asian J Psychiatr 2013; 6(6): 614– 617. doi: 10.1016/ j.ajp.2013.05.006.
18. Cailhol L, Rous­signol B, Klein R et al. Borderline personality disorder and rTMS: a pilot trial. Psychiatry Res 2014; 216(1): 155– 157. doi: 10.1016/ j.psychres.2014.01.030.
19. De Vidovich GZ, Muf­fatti R, Monaco J et al. Repetitive TMS on left cerebel­lum af­fects impulsivity in borderline personality disorder: a pilot study. Front Hum Neurosci 2016; 10: 582. doi: 10.3389/ fnhum.2016.00582.
20. Fef­fer K, Peters SK, Bhui K et al. Succes­sful dorsomedial prefrontal rTMS for major depres­sion in borderline personality disorder: Three cases. Brain Stimul 2017; 10(3): 716– 717. doi: 10.1016/ j.brs.2017.01.583.
21. Reyes-López J, Ricardo-Garcell J, Armas-Castañeda G et al. Clinical improvement in patients with borderline personality disorder after treatment with repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation: preliminary results. Braz J Psychiatry 2018; 40(1): 97– 104. doi: 10.1590/ 1516-4446-2016-2112.
22. Ustohal L, Přikrylová Kučerová H, Přikryl R et al. Repetitivní transkraniální magnetická stimulace v léčbě depresivní poruchy –  randomizovaná, jednoduše slepá, antidepresivy kontrolovaná studie. Cesk Slov Neurol N 2014; 77/ 110(5): 602– 607.
23. Albares M, Lio G, Criaud M et al. The dorsal medial frontal cortex mediates automatic motor inhibition in uncertain contexts: evidence from combined fMRI and EEG studies. Hum Brain Mapp 2014; 35(11): 5517– 5531. doi: 10.1002/ hbm.22567.
24. Destrieux C, Fischl B, Dale A et al. Automatic parcel­lation of human cortical gyri and sulci us­­ing standard anatomical nomenclature. Neuroimage 2010; 53(1): 1– 15. doi: 10.1016/ j.neuroimage.2010.06.010.
25. Fischl B, Salat DH, Busa E et al. Whole brain segmentation: Automated label­­ing of neuroanatomical structures in the human brain. Neuron 2002; 33(3): 341– 355. doi: 10.1016/ S0896-6273(02)00569-X.
26. Wil­liams JB, Kobak KA. Development and reliability of a structured interview guide for the Montgomery Asberg Depres­sion Rat­­ing Scale (SIGMA). Br J Psychiatry 2008; 192(1): 52– 58. doi: 10.1192/ bjp.bp.106.032532.
27. Ustohal L, Prikryl R, Kucerova HP et al. Emotional side ef­fects after high-frequency rTMS of the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in an adult patient with ADHD and comorbid depres­sion. Psychiatr Danub 2012; 24(1): 102– 103.
28. Padberg F, Juckel G, Präs­sl A et al. Prefrontal cortex modulation of mood and emotional­ly induced facial expres­sions: a transcranial magnetic stimulation study. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 2001; 13(2): 206– 212. doi: 10.1176/ jnp.13.2.206.
29. Pascual-Leone A, Catalá MD, Pascual-Leone Pascual A. Lateralized ef­fect of rapid-rate transcranial magnetic stim­ulation of the prefrontal cortex on mood. Neurology 1996; 46(2): 499– 502. doi: 10.1212/ WNL.46.2.499.
30. Busner J, Targum SD. The clinical global impres­sions scale: apply­­ing a research tool in clinical practice. Psychiatry 2007; 4(7): 28– 37.
31. Barnow S, Völker KA, Möl­ler B et al. Neurophysiological cor­relates of borderline personality disorder: a transcranial magnetic stimulation study. Biol Psychiatry 2009; 65(4): 313– 318. doi: 10.1016/ j.bio­psych.2008.08.016.
32. Speer AM, Kimbrell TA, Was­sermann EM et al. Opposite ef­fects of high and low frequency rTMS on regional brain activity in depres­sed patients. Biol Psychiatry 2000; 48(12): 1133– 1141. doi: 10.1016/ S0006-3223(00)01065-9.
33. Dockx R, Baeken C, Duprat R et al. Regional cerebral blood flow changes after accelerated repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of the canine frontal cortex. [abstract]. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imag­­ing 2015; 42 (Suppl 1): S290– S290.
34. Bornovalova MA, Hicks BM, Patrick CJ et al. Develop­ment and validation of the Min­nesota borderline personality disorder scale. As­ses­sment 2011; 18(2): 234– 252. doi: 10.1177/ 1073191111398320.
35. Bohus M, Kleindienst N, Limberger MF et al. The short version of the Borderline Symp­tom List (BSL-23): develop­ment and initial data on psychometric properties. Psychopathology 2009; 42(1): 32– 39. doi: 10.1159/ 000173701.
36. Kedzior KK, Reitz SK, Azorina V et al. Durability of the antidepres­sant ef­fect of the high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in the absence of maintenance treatment in major depres­sion: a system­atic review and meta-analysis of 16 double-blind, randomized, sham-control­led trials. Depress Anxiety 2015; 32(3): 193– 203. doi: 10.1002/ da.22339.
37. Demirtas-Tatlidede A, Mechanic-Hamilton D, Press DZ et al. An open-label, prospective study of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in the long-term treatment of refractory depres­sion: reproducibility and duration of the antidepres­sant ef­fect in medication-free patients. J Clin Psychiatry 2008; 69(6): 930– 934. doi: 10.4088/ JCP.v69n0607.
38. Haesebaert F, Moirand R, Schott-Pethelaz AM et al. Usefulness of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimul­ation as a maintenance treatment in patients with major depres­sion. World J Biol Psychiatry 2018; 19(1): 74– 78. doi: 10.1080/ 15622975.2016.1255353.

Ohodnoťte článek:
 

Celkové hodnocení článku:
 
0/5, hodnoceno 0x
 
 
 

Diskuze čtenářů


Vstoupit do diskuze


Open Journal System
 

Předplatné

Předplaťte si časopis

S předplatným získáváte plný přístup ke všem článkům.

více informací

 

Vědomostní test

 

Aktuální číslo

Vydání číslo: 1 / 2019

zobrazit obsah

 

 

Nejčtenější